Post by Kosmocan any advocate of what we have now (assuming there _are_ any on
UMRA!) tell me where this theoretical "post" is?
The term first-past-the-post is a metaphor from horse racing of the
plurality-voted candidate winning such a race
Yes, but in a horse (and all other than I can think of) race, there _is_
a post, which has to be passed. There is no such post in - er - FPTP.
(There _would_ be in STV - usually taken to be 50%.)
Post by KosmoI believe that it should be retained. It typically delivers
governments with strong majorities to enable the winning government to
deliver the promises within their manifesto without let or hindrance
(I've often wondered what the difference is between those two. Like way
shape or form.)
Post by Kosmoand therefore eliminates wishy washy constant changing of minds.
But going ahead boldly often makes for bad law; you mention the
dangerous dogs act below. If it has to be considered, it's more likely
to be improved. Of course we have the house of Lords, which on the whole
_does_ serve this function, but it can be guillotined, and is more
likely to be so under a supermajority, IMO.
Post by KosmoOf course if a government does not know its own mind (eg Conservatives
since 2010) then you get a complete mess so you resort to a non-binding
referendum which you interpret as binding, a lack of policies to
implement and responding to public over concern (eg Dangerous Dogs Act).
EG - I do not remember the 2010 manifesto containing any need for
austerity - prudence perhaps - but not austerity. And not having a
To be fair, it didn't predict a pandemic and (energy-affecting) war,
either.
Post by Kosmopolicy to get elected other than one to cut taxes (and the wrong ones
at that) are a good way not to get elected.
I had to run that past myself a few times, but worked it out in the end!
Yes, it does _seem_ that neither of the main parties have ever gone into
a scrap claiming they'll _raise_ taxes, other than ones that'll only
affect a minority (envy is always a good seller). The Libs/LibDems
_have_ occasionally done so - we'll raise by a penny and spend it on
education, I seem to remember for one of the scraps.
(IMO we need more ring-fenced taxes, too - the only widespread one being
the TV tax ["national insurance" and the "road fund" being two notorious
ones that are _not_ ring-fenced to what they claim, and the lottery is
similar] - but that's an argument for another day.)
Post by KosmoAnd As we do not want a political fall out in umra I am happy if no one
responds!
Well, one about the voting _method_ is arguably different from one about
other aspects of politics. But I'd prefer a _discussion_ to a fall-out
(argument).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
After I'm dead I'd rather have people ask why I have no monument than why I
have one. -Cato the Elder, statesman, soldier, and writer (234-149 BCE)